The participants in this symposium were (besides myself) Bill from INDC Journal, Ace from Ace of Spades HQ, Michele from A Small Victory, & Frank J. from IMAO.

Enjoy!

John Hawkins: I've often heard people say that, "These people who think the blogosphere will replace the media are wrong." Who are the people who think the blogosphere will replace the MSM? Do any of you feel that way? Do you know any bloggers who think we'll replace the mainstream media one day?

Michele Catalano: I never heard anyone state that except for people in mainstream media. A supplement to MSM, sure. But, we'll never replace it.

Frank J.: If it weren't for the mainstream media, who would we gripe about? Kos?

Bill: I don't know. No. No. I've had commenters bring up the concept, but I try to quickly disabuse them of the notion. The blogosphere is a complementary vehicle to the MSM. It provides analysis, punditry and oversight, as well as occasionally serving as a raw information feed for larger outlets.

Frank J.: I've always dreamed of becoming the new power conglomerate in the media world, but it ain't worked so far. All I was able to accomplish was to spread rumors that Glenn Reynolds blends puppies.

John Hawkins: Do any of you get the feeling that people in the MSM hate and fear bloggers -- hold them in contempt?

Bill: I've talked to quite a few journalists in the past couple of months, and I'd say it's about 35/65. 35% love what bloggers are doing and admire their pluck, and 65% would like to dig our graves.

Frank J.: They say we're ankle-biting, pajama wearers with political agendas.

Michele Catalano: Well, we do have political agendas, for the most part. But do they want to dig our graves because they loathe us or fear us? I'm wearing pajamas right now.

Frank J.: And we do wear pajamas, but you're missing my point.

Michele Catalano: The fear and contempt are not mutually exclusive. Sometimes it's one or the other.

John Hawkins: Personally, I'm not impressed by the Dan Rathers and Peter Brokaws of the world. They have all this ego, as if they're irreplaceable, but actually I think most literate, well informed, people can do what they do.

Ace: As much as the media claims the watchdog role it plays in our country is important, they sure seem pretty pissy about having watchdogs watching them. Perhaps they understand now why people aren't happy to see Mike Wallace attempt to interview them?

Bill: You wouldn't believe some of the background quotes I've got from people insulting me as I interviewed them. A personal favorite: "Don't you people have anything better to do?"

Frank J.: No, not really...

John Hawkins: I've had a reporter basically ask me if I have any rich republicans backing me behind the scenes, as if no one would do this for any other reason.

Ace: I wish I had a rich Republican backing me.

Michele Catalano: I wish I would get my check from Rove.

Ace: I think it's wretchedly hypocritical that the media claims itself to be the only institution capable of self-policing.

Frank J.: Blogging is a hobby until you get popular.

John Hawkins: Blogging isn't just a hobby for me, I anticipate doing this full time by the end of 2005.

Frank J.: That's ambitious.

Bill: Yeah, I think it's feasible. But, it stopped being a hobby for me a while back too. It's a second full-time job.

John Hawkins: Speaking of which -- take a look at the following numbers. This is how much money the following bloggers are making per week off of Blogads if you take how much money they charge for a weekly ad and multiply times the number of ads they have. Keep in mind that these numbers will be a bit high because rates longer than a week are a bit cheaper...

Frank J.: Instapundit is making more than my salary as an engineer.

John Hawkins: Daily Kos $14,500, Talking Points Memo $8500, Eschaton $6000, Instapundit $3250, Andrew Sullivan $5200...

Ace: John, You're killing me. Crushing me.

Bill: Jesus.

John Hawkins: Hugh Hewitt $3000...

Michele Catalano: A week?

John Hawkins: MyDD $6200

John Hawkins: Wonkette $4000

Frank J.: WONKETTTE!!!!

John Hawkins: Keep in mind that will be a touch high because these are weekly ad rates times the number of ads they have (Also keep in mind that these are gross numbers, before Blogads takes its 20% cut)...

Frank J.: I make enough for car payments and some scratch on the side.

Bill: I don't make jack.

Michele Catalano: Some months I make decent money, other months not so much. I think I undercharge. But, I'm afraid to overcharge.

John Hawkins: I will make about $1600 this month off of Blogads. Not sure if I can maintain that in Jan / Feb.

Ace: I think I've got to get in on this crazy blog-money deal.

Frank J.: I make about half my money from merchandise and the other half from Blogads. But Blogads is gaining...

John Hawkins: So is money changing the blogosphere in your opinion? As far as I can tell, it's only changing it for the better.

Frank J.: I know I wouldn't post as much if I weren't trying to improve my traffic so I can charge more for ads.

Michele Catalano: I think it shows in how much people post.

Ace: I've gotten no money thus far (save from donations), but I know I'm tempted to cool down my rhetoric in exchange for a little jack.

Bill: I don't know, I just started Blogads on a week that I averaged 22,000 visits a day (which has dropped off), and barely anyone is buying them. I have no idea why.

John Hawkins: I think it's easier to sell them if you fit into an ideological niche. Everybody knows for example when they buy an ad on Right Wing News that they're getting a conservative audience.

Michele Catalano: Right, John, and I think that's why I don't make as much as people with the same traffic as me. Not so much an ideological niche, but a blogging niche. I keep getting left wing ads...

Frank J.: I advertise that I reach a right-wing audience and those are the ads I get.

Bill: I have an ideological niche! I'm the Mort Kondracke of the blogosphere! That's sexy, right? Bueller? Bueller?

Michele Catalano: Oh you're sexier than Mort.

Frank J.: I'm the sexiest.

Bill: Ha. Impossible. I mean that in a straight way, by the way.

Michele Catalano: You're too sexy for your blog.

John Hawkins: Speaking of too sexy for her blog...

Michele Catalano: Oy. Here we go.

Ace: One thing Wonkette does well is the quick digest of news.

Bill: (Picks up baseball bat, spits on fingers)

John Hawkins: Wonkette, Michelle Malkin, people who burst on the scene and pick up big numbers -- are they good or bad for the blogosphere? I think they're huge pluses for the blogosphere because they expand the number of people who read blogs.

Bill: Malkin adds credibility. Wonkette is a mixed bag - she brings the concept that blogging can be a profit center, but misrepresents what blogging is all about.

Frank J.: Malkin was careful to show recognition to long time bloggers.

Ace: I think Wonkette was good for the blogosphere overall. Before anyone ever hears of John, Paul, or George, they hear of Ringo. Ringo is the in. Wonkette isn't the best blogger, but she is the one blogger that 10% of the people have heard of.

Frank J.: I've never read her, but I just keep hearing other bloggers dis her.

John Hawkins: I love the beatdowns she lays on Tina Brown too. Hilarious. I wish she did more humor and some bathing suit shots.

Michele Catalano: I think it has a detrimental effect on the people who have been at this a long time and get little to no recognition. But...it has an overall good effect on the blogosphere.

John Hawkins: Well, it can be discouraging for people who do good work and don't get a look, but one of the coolest things about the blogosphere to me now is how many different people can send you a lot of traffic. 3 years ago it was Instapundit and then there was everyone else. Now there are two dozen blogs who send at least 500 readers over from a link.

Michele Catalano: Right, it's no longer just the Instalanche you crave.

Bill: Right. My last Instalanche barely made a dent, to be honest. I'm not sure why. He's still the best clearinghouse for information though, and I suspect he'll remain that way, if he can maintain his frequency.

Michele Catalano: Allah sends me the same amount of traffic. VodkaPundit throws a nice link, too.

Ace: Hear, hear. Instalanches are nice, but Allah, Michelle, and Hugh Hewitt are just as big.

Michele Catalano: I give good link?

John Hawkins: Yes you do Michele.

Ace: Michele gives good link, back in the day...

Michele Catalano: The thing with Glenn is, I get so many hits from him in a day anyhow because people use his site as a portal to blogs.

John Hawkins: Yeah, Glenn is still the hub for the right side of the blogosphere. Changing subjects. Memogate: Do you think that's the coming of age moment of the blogosphere?

Bill: Memogate? Yes and no.

Frank J.: John, I do. The blogosphere was mentioned in all the major media outlets. We gained huge credibility, thanks to people like Bill who were ahead of the ball on that story.

Michele Catalano: I think the convention credentials were a big part of it. Look at it this way -- I no longer have to explain what a blog is.

John Hawkins: I think the convention was a big deal too -- here were the pajama people getting to mix with the "real journalists".

Frank J.: But, that was nothing like memogate.

Ace: I think Rathergate was the breakthrough moment. It was a two-fer -- we broke the story, and we embarrassed the MSM.

Michele Catalano: I have a question. How would the blogosphere look now if we didn't go to war with Iraq? Because I think that was a huge turning point. And I'm talking generally with the political side of the blogosphere.

Ace: I think 9-11, the Iraq war, were all huge in beginning the blogosphere but I think Rathergate is watershed from the standpoint of public perception.

Frank J.: I kept hearing from people over there that Iraq was nothing like it was portrayed on the media , but we weren't able to override all the bad imagery with facts. Rathergate is where we were able to show conclusively that the MSM had no clothes.

Bill: Look, the MSM is losing share. As some of that share filters into the blogosphere, the entrenched bloggers will grow in authority and be able to get alternative messages out.

Ace: I laughed when I read a MSM'er complaining about people increasingly getting their news through partisan filters like blogs and I'm like, @sshole, we've been getting our news from partisan filters for fifty years...

John Hawkins: Well, the blogosphere is influential mainly because of 'who' reads us, not how many people read us. We're still tiny from an audience standpoint.

Michele Catalano: I found that to be very true when we went to war, John. And that's when all the media outlets started blogging. It was huge for Command Post when we realized who was reading us.

John Hawkins: Speaking of the blogosphere and the MSM -- quick question -- give a quick and honest answer: what do you find to be more credible -- news from Glenn Reynolds or news from the New York Times?

Bill: Reynolds.

John Hawkins: I say Reynolds.

Michele Catalano: I don't read the NYT. I read Instapundit.

Frank J.: I say 'puppy blender'. NYT? Gag me with a spoon!

John Hawkins: Who's faster to correct errors when they happen in your opinion? Reynolds or the New York Times?

Michele Catalano: Reynolds. Because he can. That's the great thing about blogging. It's all done in real time.

John Hawkins: Reynolds.

Bill: Reynolds.

Frank J.: New York Times comes out once a day.

John Hawkins: I just wanted to make those points since so many people in the MSM emphasis that "Oh, we're edited and credible while those bloggers aren't".

Ace: John, if the MSM is so credible, why is the NYT reporting the rumor about Bush having a radio on his back? They can't report irresponsible LEFTWING rumors and then slam the blogosphere for occasionally publicizing a right-wing rumor.

John Hawkins: As far as the MSM is concerned, rumors are only rumors when they're about Democrats. Rumors about Republicans are just "all the news that's fit to print".

Ace: Exactly. They can't claim that their 'editors' and j-school training teaches them how to *properly* report jack@ss rumors.

Bill: The recent debate story that I publicized was a post that contained objective assertion that was correct and a subjective piece of speculation that was incorrect. That stimulated an irresponsible rumor. The Daily Recycler and I chased the story and spoke with FOX news, determining that it was indeed a pen, and issued a clarification within 24 hours. In contrast, the NY Times ran a story that jaw-droppingly speculated that George Bush was wearing a wire with no proof, and they will NOT issue a correction or obtain further information. The difference between the blogosphere and the MSM, in terms of accurate info could not be more stark. My Conclusion? It's not the blogosphere is naturally super-responsible (look at Kos), it's that the MSM has come unhinged in certain quarters.

Michele Catalano: They may as well print the Karl Rove mind meld rumors. It's laughable.

Frank J.: I heard from a credible source that Terry McAullife now has editorial control of every story in the NYT. I even have a signed document to prove it.

Michele Catalano: What font is it in?

Frank J.: It's crayon.

John Hawkins: Lol. Do you think it matters that bloggers are openly partisan and the MSM outlets claim to be unbiased?

Frank J.: They won't admit they have a problem. They're like alcoholics that need an intervention.

Michele Catalano: I think people read us BECAUSE we are openly partisan. They know what they are getting before they open the page.

Bill: Bloggers are not substitutes, and partisanship does not necessarily influence accuracy. That being said it's important to maintain some middle of the road news sources, because partisans only focus on stories that serve their interests and people that exclusively read non-neutral outlets will miss at least half the story.

Frank J.: That's what I said before. The MSM could improve its credibility ten fold by putting its biases out front.

John Hawkins: I mean take the New York Times. They stick liberal bias into their news, their editorial pages are dominated by liberals, they have a liberal perspective and yet they say, "We're not biased". Why, because they say they're not biased?

Michele Catalano: I think it was Reynolds who said the other day that the NYT had opinions on it's news pages and facts in its editorials.

Frank J.: But it is like death to them to admit bias. It's so obvious to everyone, but they won't even admit there is the possibility of bias.

Bill: Well that's the rub. They fail at being neutral. They need to declare liberal ideology, and let the WaPo take over the mantle of the paper of record. We NEED neutral news outlets.

Michele Catalano: Are there any neutral blogs? Within the political blog circle?

Frank J.: There's no neutral anything unless you stick to talking about topics that don't involve politics at all.

Michele Catalano: There's no blog named Switzerland.

John Hawkins: I don't think webpages like factcheck.org and Spinsanity are unbiased, so I'd say there is no such thing as unbiased.

Bill: I'd single out the WaPo as an outlet that has some liberal bias, but often impresses me with fair and thorough treatments of issues.

John Hawkins: Maybe you could create a neutral outlet if you ideologically split the paper down the middle...

Bill: Yes, that's an idea.

Michele Catalano: A "he said, she said" deal. And people would read whichever side suited them.

John Hawkins: ...but you'd just end up with some liberal articles and some conservative articles. That's what Factcheck and Spinsanity are in my opinion.

Frank J.: Yeah, John, you're right; your idea is dumb.

Bill: Look, the concept of neutrality is not impossible - it's just got to be systemically enforced.

Frank J.: I read liberals because I want the diversity.

Michele Catalano: I read certain liberals - and the list is getting shorter.

Frank J.: Very few aren't shrill these days.

Bill: Name a liberal blogger that's tolerable in tone.

Frank J.: Kevin Drum isn't too bad.

Bill: TalkLeft?

Michele Catalano: TalkLeft.

John Hawkins: Mickey Kaus, Michael Totten...

Bill: Kaus, yes.

Michele Catalano: Totten, definitely.

John Hawkins: Jeff Jarvis...

Ace: Partisanship isn't a problem so much when there actually is a debate of conflicting voices.

Frank J.: I so love an intelligent discussion between a conservative and a liberal, but it is so rare these days.

Bill: The problem with getting info from the partisan blogosphere is that issues are so complex that it promotes ideological information compartmentalization.

John Hawkins: Do you think the blogosphere and the more partisan media on the web is making us more shrill and split as a society?

Bill: There's plenty of material for Kos to poach from the Duelfer report, for example and also plenty of material for Right Wing News to grab without even bothering to mention negative aspects (not saying RWN isn't intellectually honest).

Ace: I think there should be more left vs. right debates and hook-ups between blogs. It's actually in all of our interest to do so. Even if I hate Oliver Willis...

Michele Catalano: I can't read Oliver anymore...

Bill: Oliver is a horrendous man. Once a blog posts pictures of dead babies for political manipulation, I'm done.

Ace: Oliver is a filet-o-fish lovin' dope. I'm just tossing it out there.

John Hawkins: My philosophy is liberal -- conservative -- it's all the same to me. The more eyeballs, the better.

Michele Catalano: I still have a lot of liberal readers. I think I keep my liberal readers because I don't always talk about politics.

John Hawkins: Switching topics again: would the blogosphere and for that matter talk radio exist if the MSM really did its job well -- was balanced, thorough, etc? In other words, do you think they've done such a terrible job that whole other forms of new media have sprang up to fill the gap?

Ace: You don't create an alternative if the main supplier is doing his job correctly.

Bill: It would exist, but not in its present, robust form. The blogosphere has grown brawny because it meets an unmet market need.

John Hawkins: I always viewed RWN as an alternative to the MSM personally. The biased way they covered the aftermath of the 2000 election inspired me to start RWN.

Michele Catalano: I don't think the blogosphere started out as an alternative to the MSM.

Bill: Yeah, but it would still be more of people posting fish recipes rather than something that makes Dan Rather leave a puddle on the floor.

Michele Catalano: Don't forget that there are huge portions of the blogosphere that don't do politics at all.

John Hawkins: Oh, I was talking about the political blogosphere, Michele. I wasn't talking about Winer and Boing Boing and stuff.

Michele Catalano: Ok. I read a lot of non-political blogs.

Frank J.: No one cares about non-political blogs.

Michele Catalano: Speak for yourself, Frank.

John Hawkins: No, he speaks for me too =D

Frank J.: I'm kidding, but personally, I don't read any.

John Hawkins: Lol J/k too -- but Dave Winer is a talentless windbag. Let me go out of my way to say that.

Michele Catalano: Agreed John.

Bill: Look, I read IMAO for my straight news, and Oliver Willis for my humor.

Ace: Oliver Willis is to comedy what Lance Armstrong is to comedy. Great line, but not mine.

John Hawkins: Anything else you gentlemen and Michele would like to cover before we hang it up?

Michele Catalano: I don't think we dissed Wonkette enough.

John Hawkins: I like Wonkette -- I tried to get her in on this.

Frank J.: You would like her. Oh, one more thing. Vote for me and Bill in the Washington Post poll and not Wonkette.

Bill: Too much @ss-kissing in the sphere. Annoying.

Frank J.: Frank answers to no one except his t-shirt babe!

John Hawkins: So what cha saying Bill -- spell it out.

Michele Catalano: Am I supposed to be kissing someone's @ss?

Bill: I'm saying that people start out as pure pundits, but very quickly get corrupted by networking. I've felt the urge.

John Hawkins: What do you mean corrupted?

Bill: I'll give you an example. I wrote a silly post about the best news anchors on TV. In the course of the post, I called Tony Snow smug and sanctimonious, and the next day he emails me. Before, no one was paying attention, and I've found that it affects my coverage and posting, ESPECIALLY as it relates to big time bloggers. Does that make sense?

Frank J.: I've felt a little pressure. Malkin was in the news a bit for her new book and I had a good joke at her expense and I almost didn't use it -- and I apologized at the end of the post. But, for the most part, I'd love the people I parody to read my blog, those on the right, I mean.

John Hawkins: I don't like to beat up on other bloggers personally, but I do it anyway...

Ace: I sort of occasionally want to say something bad about Bill O'Reilly...

Bill: ...You thought twice, right?

Ace: ...but I don't, because it might bite me down the line.

Michele Catalano: Ace, if you want to, why don't you?

Ace: Michele, because I don't want to piss someone off who might actually be in a position to do something for me.

Michele Catalano: I'm all about alienating and offending.

Bill: Yeah, alienating and offending is fun, a vital part of the blogosphere. But as journalism and blogging merge theres a natural tension.

John Hawkins: Heheh -- Michele and I have gotten in little kerfluffles and I stomped a mudhole in Andrew Sullivan when I got tired of him doing his David Brock imitation.

Michele Catalano: Yea, want to talk about free lunches, John?

John Hawkins: No, better to talk about chicks and desert islands =D Heheh..

Michele Catalano: I started my blog because I'm opinionated. I won't hold back.

John Hawkins: Here's the thing Bill. Everybody, everywhere, TV, Blogosphere, real life, you name it....tends to be nice to people who can help them or who are nice to them. You're right -- bloggers will tend to hold back on criticism of other bloggers who may send them traffic, but it's no different in the MSM or anywhere else.

Frank J.: Well, John, that's natural. You don't bite the hand that feeds you. If we sell out, new bloggers will fact check our @sses. It's a world where the small fish eats the big fish

Ace: In the early days, I was occasionally hard on Instapundit for his jack@ss libertarian glibness. I don't mention that any more.

John Hawkins: If I really, genuinely, am angry about something somebody says or really dislike them, I will say so, but if it's something that's not that big of a deal, I will let it slide with another blogger before someone in the MSM.

Bill: I put up a post that criticized Wonkette (fairly) for some very dumb things she said during Rathergate that minimized blogging; NO ONE jumped on the discussion, but when I publish a hit on Willis, it's a gangpile. Why do you think that is?

Michele Catalano: Because few people care about Wonkette, Bill.

John Hawkins: Heheh -- Michele's going to get mad on me if I say what I think about that, Bill =D....... (Besides), I've seen Wonkette absolutely slammed over and over all over the blogosphere. I slammed Wonkette for the way she covered the Reagan funeral as a matter of fact.

Michele Catalano: Don't get me started on that subject, Bill. Or about writing angry. I don't think there's anyone who writes angrier than me.

Frank J.: Real emotions connect. That's why Whittle is so successful with posting so little.

Michele Catalano: I get slammed for emotional blogging all the time.

Frank J.: Women and their emotions! It drives me crazy!

Michele Catalano: Shut up, Frank.

Frank J.: I haven't cried or smiled in twenty years, like a good man.

Ace: Women do get that. But here's something, Andrew Sullivan is objectively emotional. And yet, if you say so, he implies you're (attacking him for being gay). So what the hell? I can't note that fact, just because it is a stereotype to say a gay man is emotional? He *is* emotional, though.

Bill: I'm not touching that one.

Michele Catalano: I think women who write emotionally get treated different than men who write emotionally. But that's another story.

John Hawkins: Andrew Sullivan is a brilliant, articulate man, but his ideology and core beliefs -- beyond gay marriage -- are shifting sand.

Bill: He is brilliant, perhaps my favorite architect of prose.

Frank J.: Andrew Sullivan drew me in with his smart writing. Now he's wacky and he doesn't realize it.

Ace: He's a smart man. He's also frequently a hysterically strident and emotionally hyperbolic man.

Michele Catalano: Let me ask you all a question. What female bloggers do you read?

Ace: I read Alarming News. I read Michele. (And I read Florida Cracker).

Bill: A Small Victory.

Frank J.: I don't read other blogs.

Bill: Ilkya, Malkin...

Ace: I read... Ilyka, assuming she's a she...

Michele Catalano: @ss kissers.

John Hawkins: You, Betsy's page, I Love Jet Noise, Right Thinking Girl, Transcended, PoliPundit, Trying To Grok, Wonkette, Michelle Malkin...

Michele Catalano: Betsy's Page is a great blog.

Frank J.: There are some good women bloggers like Michele here...

Ace: I think Michele commented that Insty tends to link women only with a sexual subtext...

Bill: Insty and many other popular bloggers are notorious suckers for pixelated poon.

Frank J.: I like women who add sexy pictures of themselves to their blogs. I think it helps them get out their point.

Bill: All a gal blogger has to do is post a pretty picture and put up a post per week and they'll shoot up the TLB. I noticed that before I ever started a blog .

John Hawkins: I like women who write with a sexual subtext.

Michele Catalano: When I write with a sexual subtext, I get accused of being hypocritical.

Ace: Michele, why? Who says that?

Michele Catalano: I'm going to blog naked tomorrow. And post pictures. And write about sex.

John Hawkins: Then I promise you will be linked by RWN tomorrow =D.

Michele Catalano: They say because I slammed Wonkette I shouldn't talk about sex because it makes me a hypocrite. I never use sex for attention except in the case of charity blogging.

John Hawkins: Heheh -- actually I said that, but I'm not going to get back into that whole can of worms because it'll get you mad at me again =D And I'm enjoying you not being mad at me for 5 minutes =D

Michele Catalano: You guys are making me mad...

John Hawkins: See? See! See?

Frank J.: All the ladies like the Frankster!

Ace: Well, I don't know how posting about sex would be hypocritical then. I assumed someone was annoyed that you were using sex as a weapon as Pat Benatar advised against.

Frank J.: We need more sex weapons...

Michele Catalano: I got your heat seeking missiles right here...

Bill: I use sex to seduce my interview subjects....

John Hawkins: You people are filthy freaks. And on that note, it has been fun!

Michele Catalano: I think he's kicking us out.

Bill: Are you editing this, I hope?

Michele Catalano: Yea, he'll edit and the only thing I'll end up saying is 'sex'.

John Hawkins: Michele: Sex...with...you...guys....fun...fun!

Michele Catalano: HAH.

Frank J.: Lol.

Michele Catalano: I was naked this whole time!

John Hawkins: That's going in! Thanks everybody!

© Copyright 2001-2008 John Hawkins

hit counter